@Masterofwhine Galicia 100% agree. Bierzo and Mosel also spring to mind (still think the latter produces excellent wines that have barely increased in price)
@utdrobbo@AcademyScoop People who go to length to explain why he’s different because of x, y quality have zero grasp of probability theory. He’s undoubtedly a fine young player but he’s been lucky this year; thus likely to be overvalued.
@utdrobbo Yep, agree with the upside. Anderson is currently better but is also 1,5 years older - Fernandes is comfortably ahead of where Anderson was 1,5 year ago (not saying he will end up better than Anderson, just saying his trajectory is at least equally promising)
@henrywinter@pulpy The overrating of Rogers is a fascinating one. Scores a few belters and is really good on his days but he’s not had a particularly good season by any stretch of the imagination. 3 goals and 2 assists in 19 games in 2026 to highlight that (amongst other similar stats).
@Busby_UTD@AndyMitten@TheAthleticFC Yes. I think it’s telling that journalists and fans will much rather jump to conclusions than research the context and check his intent. Labeling people without context is, ironically, much more dividing than what Ratcliffe said… (as stupid as it might seem on face value)
@TOTDevils I don’t think it’s that complicated. Under Amorim, it was about a project, building something from the bottom, hoping to find consistency & results. But the latter was not a short-term goal. That didn’t work out & now it’s about short-term focus & results to set up next manager
@oskarutd@cmwinterburn I don’t suggest we should ‘trust’ them. To be honest, most managerial decisions are ‘wrong’ in the sense that they only last a short amount of time & will get replaced. Just look at Chelsea, Spurs, L’pool before Klopp. So it’s not an easy decision & depends on many factors.
@oskarutd@cmwinterburn I agree that they still haven’t shown they are competent enough to run MUFC (even though process and result rarely follow in a straight line) . But after Amorim’s statements, they would also have looked incompetent & indecisive *not* to do anything. Between a rock & a hard place
@Busby_UTD@mrmujac No, I’m saying it’s a completely irrelevant point when you don’t have evidence. All teams want to attack, that’s why they play football. So stating it is pointless. It’s not hard to grasp unless you insist on being a contrarian
@oskarutd@cmwinterburn That would assume that results will get worse now than under Amorim. Very little evidence to support that. Having two games without an interim makes no difference at all. Writing that after a loss (that Amorim has had several of) is hyperbole and ‘easy’ - no skin in the game.
@oskarutd@cmwinterburn So it’s not necessarily about timing but about planning (or lack of planning). I wouldn’t disagree with that. But that’s not what the original tweet says
@Busby_UTD@mrmujac Of which I asked you to provide evidence. It’s easy to claim intent (you said ‘obvious’), it’s much harder to prove it. I’m sure they would like to attack (all football teams do so it’s a moot point), but for whatever reason they don’t and it’s coming out as poor implementation.
@Busby_UTD@mrmujac That’s not evidence at all. Because we *should* be playing attacking football doesn’t mean we actually do it - that’s the issue. It’s boring & predictable. Whether that’s on the players or the manager or a combination doesn’t matter. It’s not entertaining (I agree w/@mrmujac)